See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/344817611

Library and Student Innovation Center: Makerspace!

Conference Paper · June 2018

DOI: 10.18260/1-2--30773

CITATIONS READS
4 232

6 authors, including:

Steven F Barrett Tonia A. Dousay

University of Wyoming University of Alaska Anchorage
378 PUBLICATIONS 1,769 CITATIONS 77 PUBLICATIONS 565 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Tonia A. Dousay on 30 November 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Paper ID #21466

Library and Student Innovation Center: Makerspace!

Dr. Steven F. Barrett, University of Wyoming
Dr. Steven F. Barrett, P.E., received the B.S. in Electronic Engineering Technology from the University
of Nebraska at Omaha in 1979, the M.E.E.E. from the University of Idaho at Moscow in 1986, and the
Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Austin in 1993. He was formally an active duty faculty member
and professor at the United States Air Force Academy, Colorado and is now professor of Electrical and
Computer Engineering and associate dean for Academic Programs, College of Engineering and Applied
Science, University of Wyoming. He is a senior member of IEEE and chief faculty advisor of Tau Beta
Pi. His research interests include digital and analog image processing, computer-assisted laser surgery,
and embedded control systems. He is a registered professional engineer in Wyoming and Colorado. He
authored/co-authored several textbooks on microcontrollers and embedded systems. His book, ”A Little
Book on Teaching,” was published by Morgan and Claypool Publishers in 2012. In 2004, Barrett was
named ”Wyoming Professor of the Year” by the Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching and in
2008 was the recipient of the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Professional Engineers
in Higher Education, Engineering Education Excellence Award.

Dr. Tonia A. Dousay, University of Idaho

Tonia A. Dousay is an Assistant Professor of Learning Sciences at the University of Idaho and a Google
Certified Innovator. She has more than 15 years of instructional design and eLearning project management
experience. Tonia’s teaching and research focus on design-based learning activities and the knowledge
and skills acquired and reinforced through these opportunities. Makerspaces currently serve as the hub of
her research, creating an engaging environment to play with robotics, 3D printing, 3D modeling, and mo-
bileography for K20 learners. Where some areas of education focus on STEM-learning, Tonia emphasizes
STEAM-learning, giving attention to art and how we empower learners to be interdisciplinary.
Tyler J. Kerr, University of Wyoming
Tyler Kerr received a B.A. in Geology from Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, PA in 2011, and
an M.S. in Geology (Paleontology) from the University of Wyoming in 2017. His background in pale-
ontology and interest in emergent technology has led him to pursue a career 3D scanning, rendering, and
digitizing museum collections. In addition to his digitization work, he runs the University of Wyoming’s
Coe Student Innovation Center (CSIC), the university’s newest educational STEAM-oriented campus
makerspace for students, faculty, and staff.

Mr. Larry Schmidt, University of Wyoming

Larry Schmidt is an associate librarian at the University of Wyoming and is the current Head of the
Brinkerhoff Geology Library. He holds BS degree’s in Chemistry and Biology, MS Degree in environ-
mental engineering from Montana State University and received an MLS from Emporia State University
in 2002. His interests lie in providing undergraduate and graduate students with information, data and
science literacy skills that will allow them to succeed in a global economy.
Mr. Brandon Seth Gellis, University of Wyoming
Jesse Ballard, University of Wyoming

c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018

 Library and Student Innovation Center – Makerspace!
Abstract
The College of Engineering and Applied Science together with the College of Arts and Sciences,
the College of Education, and the University of Wyoming Libraries have developed a
Library/Student Innovation Center (CSIC/SIC) makerspace, in order to spark student innovation,
creativity, and design skills. In May 2012, Governor Mead, the State legislature, and the
Wyoming Governor’s Energy, Engineering, and STEM Integration Taskforce articulated a vision
to propel the College of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS) and the University of
Wyoming to the realms of “excellence in instruction, research, and service.” Part of this
initiative included an active learning “makerspace” in the new Engineering Education and
Research Building (EERB). Makerspaces employ technology along with hands-on education to
spark student innovation, creativity, design, and entrepreneurship.

The UW Libraries have graciously provided 2500 square feet of space to develop a prototype
Library Innovation Center (LIC) during the Fall 2016 semester. Lessons learned and equipment
purchased will form the basis of the Student Innovation Center (SIC) planned for the EERB.
Groundbreaking for the EERB was October 7, 2016 with a scheduled completion of Spring 2019.

The purpose of the LIC/SIC is to provide experiential learning space for STEAM (science,
technology, engineering, arts, and math) students. The LIC/SIC provides a location for students
to explore ideas, complete class projects, or pursue an entrepreneurial innovation. Also, the
space is available to conduct classes and workshops. The space is coordinated and managed by
an onsite specialist.

The LIC/SIC planning team consists of an interdisciplinary group of faculty members and
students with a common interest: hands-on, innovative learning. In this paper, we provide
detailed information about developing a makerspace, including equipment selection, staffing,
funding, day-to-day operations, and lessons learned. This paper serves as a useful guide for
other institutions that are considering setting up a makerspace.

Overview
Over the last several years, an interdisciplinary team has stood up a makerspace within the UW
Library. The team has gathered considerable information and lessons learned about developing a
makerspace – information that the team believes will be valuable to other institutions pursuing
this same goal. In this paper, we answer the following questions: what did we do? Why did we
do it? What was our motivation? What are our goals? What is the current status of the project?
Where are we heading?

Background
In May 2012, Governor Mead, the State legislature, and the Wyoming Governor’s Energy,
Engineering, and STEM Integration Taskforce articulated a vision to propel the College of
Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS) and the University of Wyoming to the realms of
“excellence in instruction, research, and service.” Part of this initiative included an active
learning “makerspace” in the new Engineering Education and Research Building (EERB).
One of the primary objectives of the initiative was to develop a location for exploration of
creative ideas within the EERB. A makerspace provides a location for students to explore ideas,
complete class projects, or pursue an entrepreneurial innovation. As a general concept,
university makerspaces present both formal and informal learning opportunities to students.
From an educational perspective, makerspaces espouse constructivism and constructionism as
learning philosophies, incorporating collaborative and problem-based activities. Essentially, the
expertise and tools provided in makerspace facilities foster a hands-on approach to learning
based upon individual interests, building upon intrinsic motivation (Kurti, Kurti, & Fleming,
2014) [1]. Whether a student wants to learn a new skill to improve classroom performance or
participate just because it seems interesting, they can work within a makerspace to identify these
opportunities. In some cases, a facility might offer regular workshops on a topic. In others, there
might be a one-time event that showcases a particular expertise. The open access, drop-in
approach to facility operation encourages visitors to visit at any time to tinker or explore.

There’s also the notion of university-based makerspaces serving curricular needs by providing
tools and resources necessary for completing class projects. An example here might be a seminar
on problem-solving and design that challenges student teams to identify a problem, research
existing solutions, and propose a new solution through designing, prototyping, and testing. In
some cases, these experiences create entrepreneurial opportunities. In one case, a student-team
used a makerspace to design a lighted-seat prototype of a child’s toilet with a Bluetooth-enabled
application to help parents potty-train their toddlers. These types of projects can be entered into
innovation competitions or used as the foundations for other business opportunities.

With construction plans underway for the new EERB, attention quickly focused on establishing a
student innovation center (SIC) for student use that would occupy much of the second floor. The
groundbreaking for this building, however, was still more than a year out, with an anticipated
opening in Fall 2019. The maker movement had already come to campus with the opening of the
COE Makers facility, established within the College of Education in Fall 2014, and the UW 3-D
ArtScience and STEM Maker Laboratory, established in the Department of Art and Art History
in Fall 2015.

To help maintain this momentum, the SIC planning committee agreed that an intermediate and
more centrally located facility might assist with broader campus goals, build anticipation for the
new facility, and launch a network of makerspaces on campus to maximize impact and use.
Committee meeting discussions took into consideration guidance and advice learned from
opening the other spaces, including an absolute need for a facility to be easily accessible and
visible to students.

When innovation and maker labs are not directly in the flow of typical student traffic, they
become destinations that require forethought and planning rather than open-access, inviting
spaces. Additionally, windows looking into a facility provide valuable free marketing to
advertise the kinds of activities and projects that happen in the space, generating curiosity and
conversation. These considerations led the committee to look toward buildings on campus that
featured fewer administrative offices and more spaces oriented toward student services. Early
conversations with University Libraries revealed a desire to collaborate and opened up potential
for available space. This collaboration presented an opportunity to begin scouting for optimal
locations within the main library. Ultimately, a large mixed-use study area emerged as the most
suitable space to convert into an innovation center. With representatives from the library now on
the committee, plans commenced with the purchase of modular walls to enclose the area and the
design of a layout for new equipment and furniture [2].

During the preliminary planning stages, faculty within the CEAS were surveyed to find out how
an innovation facility could fit with their current practices and future curricular plans. This
survey helped inform later data-gathering efforts as the committee prepared proposals to seek
internal and external funding for both the SIC and the intermediate library innovation center
(LIC). In terms of existing practices that could benefit from or be expanded by a makerspace,
CEAS faculty highlighted activities including fabrication, prototyping, machining, programming,
and design related to software, interfaces, virtual reality, and production. Responses about
fabrication focused on circuit boards and related assemblies, fluid dynamics, concrete beam
construction, concrete batching and testing, and structural member testing. Future curricular
goals indicated a desire to expand more into 3D printing models, parts, and entire assemblies
with particular emphasis on a variety of materials. Other plans selected include robotics
experiments, micron-scale fabrication, and rapid prototyping. When asked about how such a
facility might be used outside of formal curricula, CEAS faculty noted that the innovation
centers could assist during recruiting tours, attracting students, parents, and partners.
Additionally, the spaces should accommodate projects and competitions such as the Chemical
Car Competition, DOE wind energy, ASCE Concrete Canoe, ASCE Steel Bridge, robotics
competitions, design competitions, NASA design competition(s), NAE Engineering 3U, AIChE
vaccine design competition, DUI Grand Interaction Challenge, and hack-a-thons.

As construction on the LIC began, the decision to locate the facility in a central, visible location
helped to generate interest in the facility. Some students were already familiar with these kinds
of centers because of two existing makerspaces on campus, and their word-of-mouth exchanges
helped to generate excitement. Students began contacting planning committee members with
questions regarding new student organizations such as a blacksmithing club and a 3D design and
prototyping club. Additionally, faculty members began to inquire about how to teach an entire
course or schedule individual classes in the library space.

Hundreds of university-based makerspaces exist around the United States, offering a variety of
facility experiences. In 2015, a review of top-ranked universities found that 40 had at least one
makerspace, with the vast majority indicating that the facility was housed in a department other
than Engineering and/or was open to the broader campus [3]. It is interesting to note that three
of the universities hosting makerspaces listed more than one facility, indicating different
emphases or contextual applications for the facility equipment. Also the review noted that the
most common equipment provided in these facilities were 3D printers and textile work; e.g.,
sewing machines, followed by computers for design and research/collaboration. Unfortunately,
the review did not explore the kinds of activities conducted in these facilities or how the
institutions with multiple makerspaces viewed their individual or collective roles.

A recent special issue of the International Designs for Learning showcased the learning designed
for makerspaces in cooperation with how they are designed [4]. The profiles of university
makerspaces describe using the facilities to introduce students to newer technologies such as
microcontrollers, circuitry equipment, 3D printing, augmented reality, videography, and 3D
design. One of the universities also provided unique and specific guidance related to
extracurricular design challenges rooted in realistic problems and helping students showcase
their productions through visible displays and scout-style badges.

The existing makerspaces on campus, along with the profiles and reviews of other university
facilities, helped guide decisions related to differentiating the LIC. While emerging literature and
popular media continued to cover the booming maker movement, most of the universities
profiled operated a single large facility. By launching a third facility with the fourth under
construction, the University of Wyoming inherently established a commitment to supporting
student innovation through a variety of channels. The strategic approach to include the existing
facility coordinators ensured a holistic plan that considered the needs of other disciplines as
integrated and interdisciplinary with the CEAS. Once the initial planning and equipment
ordering were completed, the committee’s attention turned toward how to maximize use of the
facility for both in- and out-of-class opportunities. For example, various courses within the
education and engineering colleges were identified as possible candidates for scheduling in the
innovation center to expose students and integrate the tools as a learning strategy. Similarly,
discussion included what kinds of special events to host. One early example included a rave-like
dance party in the evening, featuring collaborative demonstrations from theater, music, and
electrical engineering faculty and students on set-up, sound production, and music mixing. As
student interest expanded, committee members also worked to identify possible faculty sponsors
for specialized student organizations to ensure regular use of and scheduled programming in the
facility. In essence, the interdisciplinary and multi-faceted approach to use blended together
concepts represented in other institutions.

Methods
In this section we provide a step-by-step, chronological listing of activities accomplished to
establish the makerspace in the UW Library.

Formed interdisciplinary team. Starting in the summer of 2015, the CEAS and the Dean of the
University of Wyoming Libraries (Libraries) first openly discussed the idea for a makerspace, or
SIC, within the UW COE Library. The Dean of Engineering was interested in laying the
groundwork for jump-starting a student innovation and entrepreneurship space that would be in
the new CEAS EERB. By using space, the library could be modified to work as the interim
makerspace. Equipment could be purchased and the facility could be used ahead of the actual
opening of the new facility. In the fall of 2015, a Memorandum of Understanding between the
CEAS and Libraries was agreed to with the understanding that the Libraries would provide and
modify the space while equipment and staffing needs would be provided by the CEAS. With the
completion of the new EERB building, the furniture and equipment would be assessed and
anything that was still appropriate for the new space would be transferred. The Libraries plans to
reassess the space, equipment, furniture and staffing needs to determine if their continued use,
constituting and supporting a makerspace, is appropriate.

The Deans approached the Associate Dean of Libraries and two librarians to start the
discussions. After that initial meeting, a group was created to start the planning for the LIC. The
early planning team consisted of two librarians (heads of the Brinkerhoff Geology Library and of
the Learning Resource Center) and one engineer from the Chemical Engineering Department.
Members of the team were already familiar with the concept of a makerspace and were excited
about helping facilitate this idea. The purpose of this team was to explore the arrangement for
creating the space in the library and identifying equipment and costs appropriate for a facility
within the library.

Investigated other makerspaces on campus. We also learned about other spaces on campus
with makerspace equipment. There is a small space devoted to making in the College of
Education; the Learning Resource Center has tinkering equipment, and the Art Department has
some 3D printers and a vinyl cutter. With the goal of the new COE Student Innovation Center
(CSIC) to be a space for anyone to use, the team decided to bring in the individuals working on
these spaces. The UW COE Library is of course a very busy space, so foot traffic could not hurt
as we looked for exposure for the space and also to advertise the future home of the SIC in the
new EERB. With this in mind the team grew with the addition of representatives from the
College of Education, Department of Art, CEAS Shop Manager, and a member from the
University of Wyoming Information Technology Department.

Detailed planning efforts. In the fall of 2016, the group started to move ahead with the planning
for the CSIC and were invited to take part to help plan for the SIC space in the new EERB. The
planning team started meeting every other week as the floor plan for the UW COE Library was
finalized and equipment for the space was ready to be ordered. We started our efforts to hire a
manager for the space in the spring of 2017, intending to hire the part-time position starting that
summer.

Developed concept of network of makerspaces. The existing makerspaces on campus and

collaboration with these personnel demonstrated the potential to leverage local, contextualized
facilities within disciplines with an open access model. The makerspace housed in Education
targeted preservice teachers specifically and showed how these students might use the
technologies as future teachers. The makerspace in Art targeted design students learning how to
create in 3D with various media for artistic expression. The planned SIC would target
Engineering disciplines but also provide the greatest variety of tools and feature the largest
space. In designing the CSIC, it became clear that a network of facilities might help coordinate
access and focus contextualized activities and expertise. In concept, this idea welcomes students
to whichever facility is easiest to access and/or most comfortable for them. While discussing
project goals or expectations, the visitor might be referred to one of the other makerspaces based
on necessary tools, upcoming programming, and/or in-house expertise. For example, a student
team in an Education seminar conceptualized a concept for easily moving bales of hay manually.
The students used tinkercad.com to sketch the initial handle idea and brought it to the in-college
makerspace. After consulting with the work-study students on staff, the team was referred to the
Art makerspace to work with one of the interns to modify the design and produce it on one of
their 3D printers. This networked approach helps mitigate potential overloading issues that are
sometimes experienced in single facilities and helps reinforce the interdisciplinary approach
embedded in the maker movement.
Visited other spaces to adopt best practices and lessons learned. The Pikes Peak Library
District (PPLD) in Colorado Springs, Colorado has an outstanding makerspace at Library 21c.
The Creative Computer Commons (C3) portion of PPLD has two makerspaces available for
public use. These makerspaces are well established and well run. The development team took a
fieldtrip to PPLD to learn more about the day-to-day operations of a makerspace [5].

Developed extensive equipment list for LIC and SIC. The development team constructed a
list of equipment for both the CSIC and the EERB SIC based on the expertise of team members,
recommendations from the PPLD C3 visit, and CEAS shop expertise. The list of desired
equipment for the CSIC is provided in Appendix 1.

Established fund-raising goals. To fund the equipment for the CSIC, approximately $180,000
was required (reference Appendix 1). The Dean of CEAS pledged the first $60,000 of
equipment money. To raise the remaining funds, the development team approached two other
groups on campus:
• The College of Engineering and Applied Science University of Wyoming Engineering
Fund for Enrichment (UWEFE), and
• The University of Wyoming University Central Student Technology Committee.

Both groups graciously agreed to fund the remaining equipment startup costs for the CSIC.

On a related note, a private donor family contributed $250,000 which was matched by the state
for a total of $500,000 as an endowment for technology upgrades for the SIC efforts.

Hired director. In July 2017, the CSIC planning committee hired Tyler Kerr, a University of
Wyoming graduate program alumnus, to oversee and direct the day-to-day operations of the
makerspace. In his role as director of the makerspace, Mr. Kerr is responsible for managing
employees, maintaining equipment, hardware, and software, and planning and implementing
community and educational outreach.

Established day-to-day operations. The CSIC makerspace is open to students from Monday to
Friday and is staffed by one part-time staff member (the makerspace director) and five students
(makerspace educators). Typical day-to-day activities include short tours and demonstrations for
curious students, printing objects for visitors, and brief tutorials on 3D printing. Presently, the
CSIC caters predominantly to individuals and small groups interested in 3D printing. The
makerspace staff also receive requests to 3D-scan objects using the CSIC’s Artec Eva structured
light scanner. At the same time, there are requests for tours – usually lasting one hour -- from
educators interested in demonstrating the capabilities of emergent technologies that can benefit a
wide range of STEAM disciplines.

Staffing. The CSIC is staffed by five student employees. Students hired were those who
expressed a passion for emergent technologies, innovation, discovery, and creative design, and
who had an interest in DIY projects. Experience with emergent technologies was not a job
requirement. Mr. Kerr developed rigorous in-house training programs during the first semester to
fill any gaps in the student educators’ knowledge of makerspace trends and to ensure that they
were well-versed in the makerspace’s equipment, hardware, and software. All CSIC staff
members, including Mr. Kerr, are expected to 1) monitor and maintain the center’s hardware and
software for optimal performance; 2) interact, assist, and engage effectively with a diverse
population of K-12 educators, UW students, faculty, staff, and members of the local community;
3) develop and deliver brief onsite lessons, modules, or workshops for K-12, college and general
audiences; and 4) respond to evolving community requests for new technologies or equipment.

Hours. Initially, the CSIC was open Monday through Thursday from 12pm to 8pm MT and
Friday from 12pm to 7pm MT in order to accommodate visitors after work and school. The
hours of operation were adjusted for the Spring 2018 semester to better suit morning visitors,
since the CSIC received few visitors in the evening. Currently, the CSIC operates from 10am to
6pm MT.

Grand opening and ribbon cutting. The facility opened in the fall semester of 2017 with the
grand opening during homecoming weekend October of 2017. The facility has been running for
the semester and this spring we started ramping up our advertising for the space.

Results
Even without large-scale advertising campaigns, the CSIC has attracted plenty of attention
thanks to word-of-mouth mentions. The center has welcomed 888 unique visitors since it started
counting use statistics in September, and has likely seen closer to 1,000 total visitors since its
inception after hiring Mr. Kerr in late July. There have been approximately 200 visitors a month,
of whom approximately 75% are drops-ins with printing requests and 25% are tour groups. On a
given day, the CSIC sees 5 to 10 unique visitors a day. These visitor numbers are predicted to
increase following a series of campus and community advertisements and workshops planned for
the Spring 2018 semester.

Equipment use leans overwhelmingly toward the 3D printers, followed by a few monthly
requests for 3D scans of objects. Open houses and tours are requested most often by middle
school educators and youth organizations (e.g., Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts). Efforts to engage
extracurricular collegiate groups, college classes, and campus student-led academic
organizations will be addressed through more frequent advertising campaigns and informational
hands-on open houses.

Crucial to the tracking of usage statistics is a recent initiative to digitize attendance and
equipment use. The CSIC team is developing a sign-in kiosk and online visitor surveys. Not only
will these efforts enable the team to get accurate counts of visitors, but they will generate
valuable data about usage and requests for new equipment, workshops, or open houses in the
space.

At present, one recognized student organization (RSO) meets weekly in the makerspace. The
Collegiate Entrepreneurs' Organization (CEO) is a 20-member group that uses the resources of
the CSIC to help students prototype designs and cultivate the skills required to successfully start
and run their own businesses. Establishment of a makerspace-specific RSO is under way by
makerspace staff. A primary and ongoing goal of the CSIC is to promote use of the space to as
many additional student organizations as possible.
Two or three open houses or equipment demonstrations are typical each month. These events
serve several purposes, such as: 1) fostering youth interest in the wide-ranging academic and
hobbyist applications that a makerspace provides; 2) encouraging faculty and staff to consider
how the space might be used in their curricula or in academic research projects; and 3)
motivating community members to consider how the space might be used for personal, research,
or hobbyist projects.

It is common for the CSIC to host one or two tours per month, largely for middle school or
young adult organizations. Middle school tours often include a 30-minute tour of all the available
technologies followed by interaction with specific equipment (from littleBits to Lego to the
modeling software) at the request of the organizer for the remainder of the period. Due to time
constraints, the hour-long tours do not often include a 3D printing component. Most popular
among young adults is a 30-minute introductory 3D modeling lesson using the user-friendly
Sculptris program.

Several special events have been hosted at the CSIC. During the UW Impact Weekend (an event
for high-performing high school students), the center held technology demonstrations for 125
visitors. The CSIC also hosted an activity for the UW Latina Youth Conference, at which 119
young women were encouraged to use the engineering design process and equipment at the CSIC
to imagine, plan, construct, and test catapults for distance, accuracy, and precision using
household materials. Furthermore, during the Wyoming State Science Fair, the CSIC hosted an
activity for 91 middle school students who had been challenged to think through the engineering
design process and come up with creative solutions for buoyant, wind-powered, weight-bearing
“cargo ships” made of Lego.

As yet, no college courses have been hosted in the makerspace. However, several STEAM
instructors have utilized the space to develop hands-on components for their coursework,
including haptic feedback devices for hearing or sight-impaired individuals, chemical
engineering petri dish supports, brain slice teaching reproductions, and 3D-printed woodwind
reeds. The CSIC team is optimistic that the center will become an active hub for hosting courses.

Discussion
Challenges. Although the CSIC is not the first makerspace on the University of Wyoming
campus, it is the first large-scale, multidisciplinary facility at the University to provide
substantial, accessible, dedicated space for students to create, collaborate, and innovate. As such,
the first semester of operation at the CSIC was met with many new challenges, such as: 1)
finding ways to actively engage visitors 2) ensuring print quality and overall quality control; and
3) promoting underutilized equipment in the space. Each challenge merits a closer look:
• Finding ways to actively engage visitors. Bearing in mind that the overarching goal of the
makerspace is to provide a location for students to explore ideas, complete class projects, or
pursue an entrepreneurial innovation, the CSIC team focused on meeting those first-semester
challenges to the best of their ability. The early operational focus was primarily on space
development, staff training, and visitor feedback in order to determine what resources,
instruction, or workshops visitors would wish to see in upcoming semesters. Less focus was
 spent on campus-wide advertising, and any publicity was largely through word-of-mouth.
During the second semester of operation, with staff trained and equipment operating well, the
focus turned to the hosting monthly instructional workshops for faculty, staff, and students as
well as to awareness campaigns such increased campus advertising (both print and online).
Although the CSIC team is detecting greater interest from the center’s target users overall, it
is still too early in the center’s operation to make causal connections between the awareness
campaigns and greater usage of the space and its available resources by students and
community members. Similarly, it is premature to gauge the center’s success in attracting
another target user group: University faculty and staff who might wish to host classes and
conduct research using the space’s facilities. The main issue is one of timing: when the
makerspace officially opened its doors in October 2017, faculty, educators, and researchers
had already developed their curricula or research plans for the semester. Therefore, during
the second semester, the CSIC team spent more time and resources raising awareness among
faculty and staff, using large-scale campus poster advertisements, email campaigns, and
hosting faculty and staff open houses. The team expects positive results from these efforts to
be reflected in faculty and staff participation in the academic year ahead.

• Ensuring print quality and overall quality control. 3D printers are the most popular
technology housed in the space, and consequently are the machines used most often. As a
result, regular maintenance is required to ensure acceptable print quality. In the first semester
of operation few visitors knew how to use the software necessary to 3D print objects.
Because of this, most 3D printing, including prints for visitors, was completed by staff
members. This proved to be challenging for the six staff members for two reasons: 1) print
preferences and personal settings varied considerably; and 2) the first printers were largely
unreliable and inconsistent over time. Care was taken to ensure consistency in use among
staff members so that print quality and cost would remain constant over time. The CSIC set
out to keep almost all services free and accessible to encourage frequent student use. Any
charges, such as the $1.50 per hour to use the 3D printers, was implemented only to recoup
the costs of consumable materials, a practice which is consistent with other 3D printing price
models on campus. The issue of cost, however, does play a role in the larger issue of quality
control, since different settings influence the timing of a print. To combat this, individual use
profiles (low resolution, high resolution, fast draft) were created around each machine and
each machine’s known printing issues. This was coupled with extensive logs for each print
which included time, estimated cost, machine used, filament color used, and staff member.
Thus in theory, a user could print the same object months apart at the same quality and cost.

• Promoting underutilized equipment in the space. In addition to the 3D printers, the CSIC
houses littleBits circuitry kits, Lego, Lego Mindstorms robotics, Arduino kits, an electronic
bench, a 3D scanner, and a suite of different modeling and CAD software. Because some of
these kits and tools are less visible than the 3D printers, they are largely underutilized. For
the future, the CSIC team plans to host lively and more detailed information campaigns
(campus event booths, community advertisements, active community engagement during
 community events, free workshops) to further engage the center’s target users and promote
its underutilized equipment.
Conclusions
We are pleased by the early success of the CSIC. We will continue to look for ways to publicize
and expand its use. The lessons learned in standing up the CSIC will directly be applied to the
development of the EERB SIC. We hope this paper will be useful to others considering starting
a makerspace.

Acknowledgements
We thank College of Engineering and Applied Sciences Dean Michael Pishko, the College of
Engineering and Applied Science University of Wyoming Engineering Fund for Enrichment
(UWEFE), and the University of Wyoming University Central Student Technology Committee
for providing startup funds to launch this effort. We also thank UW Libraries Dean Ivan Gaetz
for providing 2500 square feet of COE Library space.
References

1. Kurti, R. S., Kurti, D., & Fleming, L. (2014). The philosophy of educational makerspaces:
Part 1 of making an educational makerspace. Teacher Librarian, 41(5), 8–11.
2. T. A. Dousay, “An evolving makerspace for teacher education,” Int. J. Des. Learn., vol. 8,
no. 1, pp. 69–81, 2017.
3. T. W. Barrett, M. C. Pizzico, B. Levy, and R. L. Nagel, “A review of university maker
spaces,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–16, 2015.
4. M. J. Dondlinger, J. McLeod, and C. Bigenho, “Special issue on makerspace design cases,”
Int. J. Des. Learn., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. i–ii, 2017.
5. https://ppld.org/library-21c, Library 21c (LI)
 Appendix 1. Coe Student Innovation Center (CSIC) equipment list.
Appendix 1: Library Innovation Center Equipment List
Equipment Item Source Qty Cost
*Lego Wall Reference Appendix 11 $8830
*Little Bits Pro Library with Reference Appendix 11 $4955
storage
*ProJet 1200 3D printer $5000
*Vinyl Cutter US Cutter MH 34in BUNDLE, Supplies + Tools - 1 $320
$320 on Amazon
*Computers Dell XPS 8900 Desktop - $1469 each Tower plus 2 $2938
monitors, mouse and keyboard
https://www.amazon.com/Dell-XPS-8900-
Desktop-
Generation/dp/B01E5WQ5XE/ref=sr_1_8?s=pc&ie
=UTF8&qid=1475707552&sr=1-
8&keywords=dell+computer

*Epson “Graphic Arts” Large http://www.epson.com/cgibin/Store/jsp/Product.do?U 1 $3000

Format Scanner eCookie=yes sku=E11000XL-GA

Note: Large documents can be digitized. Typical

applications include:
• Engineering drawings
• Maps
• Newspapers
• Scrapbooks
• Photographs

*Electrical/Electronics Reference detailed list at Attachment 3 $11,000

Module
*3D scanner ARTEC Eva 1 $19,800
https://www.artec3d.com/
Note: “You can use the 3D scanners to quickly capture
just about any industrial object, from a small
mechanical part to a turbine, with astonishing accuracy.
The resulting 3D model can then be exported to a
variety of CAD & CAM programs and from there gauged
and modified to improve the product’s design and
performance or integrate it into a new production
system.”
*Furniture
- 24 roll about tables - Table $300 $7200
- 48 chairs - Chair – Steelcase, cachet 5 Star Chair $490 $23520
LIC consumables the paper towels, cleaning supplies, filament, toner/ink, $5,000
etc. (estimated to be $5,000 per year)
Robot module Reference Appendix 2 76,648.35
Arduino startup package Reference Appendix 13 $2,869.86
Total LIC $171,081

View publication stats